Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
An approved resolution plan that fixes distribution to dissenting financial creditors under Section 30(2)(b) read with Section 53(1) remains binding once approved under Section 31, and the creditor is entitled to the higher of the plan amount or liquidation value. The CoC's commercial wisdom in approving a liquidation-value based distribution mechanism could not be revisited by the Monitoring Committee, whose role was confined to implementation. A later attempt by the Monitoring Committee to reduce the dissenting creditor's entitlement was held to be an impermissible modification of the approved plan. The reliance on India Resurgence ARC v. Amit Metaliks was rejected because the creditor was not seeking anything beyond the CoC-approved liquidation value.
An approved resolution plan that fixes distribution to dissenting financial creditors under Section 30(2)(b) read with Section 53(1) remains binding once approved under Section 31, and the creditor is entitled to the higher of the plan amount or liquidation value. The CoC's commercial wisdom in approving a liquidation-value based distribution mechanism could not be revisited by the Monitoring Committee, whose role was confined to implementation. A later attempt by the Monitoring Committee to reduce the dissenting creditor's entitlement was held to be an impermissible modification of the approved plan. The reliance on India Resurgence ARC v. Amit Metaliks was rejected because the creditor was not seeking anything beyond the CoC-approved liquidation value.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
